https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79042
Maxim Ostapenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
*** Bug 77345 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79079
Bug ID: 79079
Summary: [6/7] Wrong code gen for __builtin_mul_overflow when
TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION (32, 64) == false
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15485
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15538
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|6.0 |6.3.0, 7.0
--- Comment #8 from Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72749
--- Comment #7 from Arseny Solokha ---
I wonder if the following ICE is somehow related to the one reported here. I'll
file a new PR if it's not.
% powerpc-e500v2-linux-gnuspe-gcc-7.0.0-alpha20170108 -O1 -c dsmbs5u1.c
dsmbs5u1.c: In function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72749
--- Comment #8 from Arseny Solokha ---
int
gd (char ff)
{
int mi;
for (;;)
{
ff += 59 /* 197 also works */;
if (ff != 0)
mi = 0;
else
return 0;
}
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78994
--- Comment #4 from PeteVine ---
I'm delighted to report **not** targeting Cortex-A53 actually incurs a
performance penalty sometimes ;)
http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1701128-TA-GCCCOMPAR79
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yet another heuristic would be to suppress warnings if the deprecated
attributes have the same string literal in the attribute-argument-clause, i.e.
treat the string as a grouping mechanism, so that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Clang and EDG both procuce two warnings for this code, on the variable
definition and the call to operator+
struct [[deprecated("D is bad mmmkay")]] D {
void f(const D&);
};
void D::f(const D&) { }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
-mno-lra calls rs6000_emit_move to load the address of the const mem
it creates; -mlra does not. It should, but how what where.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77345
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14844
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15338
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2006-02-26 19:26:22 |2017-1-12
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72749
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #7)
> I wonder if the following ICE is somehow related to the one reported here.
> I'll file a new PR if it's not.
This is a different bug (it still happens
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Then we get _another_ warning on the definition of that member function:
struct [[deprecated("D is bad mmmkay")]] D {
void f(const D&);
};
void D::f(const D&) { }
d.cc:2:18: warning: ‘D’ is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77345
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
As the ICE reported here is reproducible in my setup, I can confirm that the
patch posted in PR71724 fixes this one too, so this PR is really a duplicate.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15039
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15091
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15272
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P3
Known to fail|6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed. The constant is forced to mem in LRA.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14494
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P3
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
Bug ID: 79078
Summary: Warnings from deprecated attribute are too noisy
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 12 21:29:43 2017
New Revision: 244383
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244383=gcc=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/79069
* cfgrtl.c (rtl_tidy_fallthru_edge): For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78304
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
More notes to self:
The locations within the string_concat_db for this concatenation are all
spelling locations, rather than virtual locations. The reason is that
c-lex.c's lex_string calls cpp_get_token
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This warns about the use of D within its own class body:
struct [[deprecated("D is bad mmmkay")]] D {
void f(const D&);
};
d.cc:2:18: warning: ‘D’ is deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79004
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Thu Jan 12 22:02:57 2017
New Revision: 244386
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244386=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-01-12 Michael Meissner
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78994
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-01/msg00637.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79068
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78304
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78304
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Notes to self:
PRIu32 etc are described in:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/types/integer#Format_macro_constants
Ideal would be a fix-it hint that suggests the correct macro, but that's clealy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40411
--- Comment #32 from Jeff Downs ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #31)
> The attached patch does this, and includes a forward port of Jeff's
> patch to escape special characters like `:' in %{S:X} expressions.
[...]
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79068
Bug ID: 79068
Summary: [7 Regression] Bootstrap failure on powerpc64-linux
and armv7hl-linux-gnueabi in libgo
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
Bug ID: 79069
Summary: [7 Regression] Bootstrap failure on s390x-linux while
building libgo
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79068
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79067
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79061
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Is this after the fix for PR79042?
I am nearly certain that it was after that fix.
Before, I got an UBSAN overflow but only when combining OpenMP, LTO,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77283
--- Comment #11 from rdapp at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Any progress on this? The patch fixes the problem for s390x (no performance
regressions), but without it we see the regression in SPEC2006's libquantum all
the time, I guess the same is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #3)
> > --disable-bootstrap
>
> ?
Originally (the #c0 error) it has been of course --enable-bootstrap). But when
trying to reproduce it, I didn't want to wait so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79065
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40411
--- Comment #31 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
I've started looking at this again.
Norm's patch has a few problems:
* For one, it matches a couple of alias names for -std values, which
will never hit the specs machinery.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Vanilla r244305, and
../configure --disable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c,c++,go,lto \
--with-long-double-128 --with-arch=z9-109 --with-tune=z10
make -j4
on s390x.
Let me retry with latest trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77283
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #39469|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77283
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
And maybe PR77366 is too simplified. The following testcase is "fixed":
void
foo(unsigned int size, unsigned int *state)
{
unsigned int i;
for(i = 0; i < size; i++)
{
if(state[i] & 1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79071
Bug ID: 79071
Summary: Add test case for PR/65618
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79071
--- Comment #1 from James Cowgill ---
Created attachment 40510
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40510=edit
a-except.ads
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79061
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #3 from Dominik Vogt ---
> --disable-bootstrap
?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71627
--- Comment #6 from Khuong Nguyen Tan ---
(In reply to Senthil Kumar Selvaraj from comment #5)
> Fixed in trunk (7.0)
Thanks Senthil Kumar Selvaraj.
It was worked !!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40411
--- Comment #30 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 40507
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40507=edit
combined proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79070
--- Comment #1 from Björn Fahller ---
More info: adding an alias for a function signature involving the ambiguous Foo
in the above program gives a directly misleading error message:
using type = void(Foo);
c.cpp:12:18: error: expected ';'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt ---
What are the revision and the configure flags that trigger this, please?
r244350 bootstraps without problem here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79062
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67336
Yuri Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tetra2005 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79070
Bug ID: 79070
Summary: Unhelpful error message for ambiguous type in template
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79068
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reproduced on gcc110.fsffrance.org vanilla r244305 and
../configure --enable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c,c++,go,lto --prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #6 from Dominik Vogt ---
Confirmed; bisecting now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The ICE is during the jump2 pass, there is EDGE_FALLTHRU in between
(note 21 1 942 2 [bb 2] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(insn 942 21 943 2 (unspec_volatile [
(code_label 0 0 0 10311 (nil) [2 uses])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79068
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It happens both with profiledbootstrap and bootstrap.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78142
tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77283
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, I'm somewhat fed up with the lack of maintainance shown by the pass
submitter. He doesn't have write-after-approval nor a bugzilla account.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And with r244350 ../configure --disable-bootstrap
--enable-languages=c,c++,go,lto --with-long-double-128 --with-arch=z9-109
--with-tune=z10
reproduced too.
Note that without --enable-checking=release, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71270
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71406
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71433
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77283
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77345
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78604
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For function sign_lt and uns_lt, the change causes worse code generation
unfortunately. Take uns_lt as example, the difference in optimized dump is as
like:
529,530c529,530
< vect_cst__32 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69602
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71285
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71710
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Jan 12 14:28:38 2017
New Revision: 244364
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244364=gcc=rev
Log:
PR66284 remove std::function special case for reference_wrapper
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78633
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If the original insn that has the op.set_src rtx in it is not removed by the
splitter (which it seems it is not), and it is just expected to be removed
during DCE later, then doing copy_rtx is the right
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71207
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 40512
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40512=edit
Patch candidate
Btw. I really believe this should be marked as P1 because it creates invalid
builtin_unreachable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71966
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65206
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 72739 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72739
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72749
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46555
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13979
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71169
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71237
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70321
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71207
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71965
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78768
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79058
--- Comment #5 from Arnd Bergmann ---
Created attachment 40511
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40511=edit
rtl dump 256r.ed_dce and 257r.combine
Here are four dumps, I hope this is what you are asking for:
latest gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78633
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> When a fix exists, why hasn't it been posted to gcc-patches?
Because, like I wrote in comment #13, I would like to check if there might be a
better fix for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79069
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe the easiest fix would be to emit the __morestack magic call patterns as
ASM_OPERANDS like one that is emitted for asm goto. The cfgrtl.c etc. code has
already years of fixes to handle those calls and
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo